The Crucified King: Atonement and Kingdom in Biblical and Systematic Theology Paperback – May 27, 2014

This book gives a fantastic treatment of the kingdom of God theme in Scripture, and how the cross is the throne from which Christ rules as king. I especially enjoyed the chapters on Mark and on Isaiah, and will find myself returning to them frequently. Due to the treatment of the kingdom theme, I would definitely recommend buying and reading this book.However, when the author comes to the atonement, the book falls off a cliff. I simply have to say that the author did not do his research. Historically speaking, the Christus Victor theme of the cross cites the injustice of Jesus’ death on the cross as the mechanism by which Jesus gains victory over sin, Satan, and death. In other words, on the cross Jesus suffers all of sin’s destruction unjustly, so that divine justice would enact the reversal of this destruction in his resurrection. Below are quotations from major theologians throughout history to articulate how this works. But the author of this work seems completely unaware of this, and makes the historically false claim that Christus Victor has no mechanism for how Christ accomplished his victory, so he tries to use Penal Substitution as the mechanism. But Penal Substitution runs directly contrary to the historic Christus Victor position. On Christus Victor, Jesus’ death is an unjust death at the hands of sinners (like Stephen’s death in Acts 7) whereas on Penal Substitution, Jesus’ death is a just death at the hands of God (like Herod’s death in Acts 12).See the following quotations for how, historically, the Christus Victor model depended upon the injustice of Jesus’ death. Augustine states that the cross is where the devil lost his right of death over Humanity because he unjustly killed the Son of God in whom there was no sin:"It is not then difficult to see that the devil was conquered, when he who was slain by Him rose again. It is something more, and more profound of comprehension, to see that the devil was conquered when he thought himself to have conquered, that is, when Christ was slain. For then that blood, since it was His who had no sin at all, was poured out for the remission of our sins; that, because the devil deservedly held those whom, as guilty of sin, he bound by the condition of death, he might deservedly loose them through Him, whom, as guilty of no sin, the punishment of death undeservedly affected. The strong man was conquered by this righteousness, and bound with this chain, that his vessels might be spoiled, which with himself and his angels had been vessels of wrath while with him, and might be turned into vessels of mercy." (Augustine. De Trinity. Chapter 15)John Chrysostom agrees,“It is as if Christ said, ‘Now shall a trial be held, and a judgment be pronounced. How and in what manner? He (the devil) smote the first man (Adam), because he found him guilty of sin; for it was through sin that death entered in. But he did not find any sin in Me; wherefore then did he fall on Me and give Me up to the power of death? . . . How is the world now judged in Me?’ It is as if it were said to the devil at a seat of judgment: ‘Thou didst smite them all, because thou didst find them guilty of sin; wherefore then didst thou smite Christ? Is it not evident that thou didst this wrongfully? Therefore the whole world shall become righteous through Him.’” (Chrysostom, John. Homily LXVII. Database online. http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf114.iv.lxix.html)Anselm of Canterbury says this aspect is part of the popular view of atonement in his day. It is justice that sets Jesus free from death, not justice that kills Jesus:“That God, in order to set mankind free, was obliged to act against the devil by justice rather than mighty power. We reason that thus the devil, having killed Him in whom there was no guilt deserving death and who was God, would justly lose the power which he used to have over sinners.”( Anselm, Why God Became Man. Book 1, Chapter 7)Thomas Aquinas affirms this as well:“Christ's Passion delivered us from the devil, inasmuch as in Christ's Passion [the devil] exceeded the limit of power assigned him by God, by conspiring to bring about Christ's death, Who, being sinless, did not deserve to die. Hence Augustine says (De Trin. xiii, cap. xiv): "The devil was vanquished by Christ's justice: because, while discovering in Him nothing deserving of death, nevertheless he slew Him. And it is certainly just that the debtors whom he held captive should be set at liberty since they believed in Him whom the devil slew, though He was no debtor."And even Martin Luther applies this loss of rights to the Law rather than the devil:“Thou hearest that Christ was caught in the bondage in which we all were held, was set under the Law, was a man full of all grace, righteousness, etc., full of life, yea, He was even the Life itself; now comes the Law and casts itself at Him and would deal with Him as with all other men. Christ sees this, lets the tyrant perform his will upon Him, lets the reproach of all guilt fall against Himself as one accursed, yea, bears the name that He Himself is the curse, and goes to suffer for this cause, dies, and is buried. Now, thinks the Law, He is overpowered; but it knew not that it had so grievously mistaken itself, and that it had condemned and throttled the Son of God; and since it has now judged and condemned Him, who was guiltless and over whom it had no authority, it must in its turn be taken, and see itself made captive and crucified, and lose all its power, and lie under the feet of Him whom it had condemned.”(Luther, Martin. Works, XXIII., p.709)It is true that Jesus “became a curse for us (Gal 3:13)” but the point is that he suffers the curse unjustly, so that justice would enact the reversal of the curse through his resurrection. Lastly, when our Lord was roaming around Narnia in the form of a giant, magical, not-safe-yet-good lion, he said,“when a willing victim who had committed no treachery was killed in a traitor’s stead, the Table would crack and Death itself would start working backward.”Of course there is a substitutionary aspect to this, in which Aslan suffers in Edmund’s place, but with two important qualifications that function as refutations to Penal Substitution: (1) Aslan suffers unjustly, not justly, and (2) Edmund will still have to die at some point. Aslan does not die so that Edmund will avoid death, but so that Edmund will die (and rise) “in Aslan.”In Scripture as well, it is explicitly stated that Jesus’ death is unjust, and it is the injustice of Jesus’ death that makes his death significant. Just to cite a couple examples, in Luke 23, the repentant thief on the cross says, “Though we are under the same sentence of condemnation, we indeed are suffering justly, for we are receiving what we deserve for our deeds; but this man (Jesus) has done nothing wrong (Luke 23:41).” Notice, the logic of the penitent thief’s statement is not “in my place condemned he stood,” but “we are under the same sentence of condemnation, for me it is just, and for Jesus it is unjust.” 1 Peter 2:18-25 is another decisive passage on this issue. Peter, commenting on Isaiah 53, makes it explicit that Jesus’ death is unjust (v.21-11) and that it is the unjust suffering of the righteous that “finds grace with God.” Additionally, Jesus does not die on the cross so that we might avoid death, but so that we might “die to sin and live to righteousness (v.24).” Lastly, I should note that with regard to Isaiah 53, the logic of the text is not “by his wounds we avoid being wounded” which is Penal Substitution, but “by his wounds the wounded are healed.” Jesus shares in suffering the wounds of the wounded, but he alone suffers this unjustly, meriting the healing of these wounds through his resurrection.Jesus death is unjust, not just, and it is therefore horribly wrong and distracting to say that Jesus’ death “satisfied the wrath of God.” God’s justice is satisfied in the resurrection as the reversal and restitution of Jesus’ unjust suffering and death on the cross. We should summarize the atonement and justice relationship this way: Due to God’s gracious covenant, justice requires Restoration for destruction suffered by innocent parties. Humans have totally and severely destroyed themselves by their own sin (God is not damaged by our sin. In the case of sin against God, sin is an offense that is to the destruction of the offender). God desires to enact Restoration for this destruction, but Humans are not innocent, they are guilty. There is none righteous, not one. So the question is: How can a just God, a covenant God, enact Restoration for guilty Humanity’s self-destruction? Answer: God becomes a Human in the person of Jesus Christ, lives completely innocently (or righteously) and therefore merits the covenantal blessings by which Humanity’s destruction will be restored. Jesus then voluntarily endures all of Humanity’s sinful destruction against himself by suffering crucifixion at the hands of all Humans on the cross. Jesus therefore merits Restoration for all of Humanity’s sinful destruction, for he alone has suffered sin’s destruction as an innocent party. This Restoration manifests in His resurrection, when “God raised our Great Shepherd up from the dead through the blood of the eternal covenant (Heb 13:20).” So the correct response to the question “Why did Jesus die?” is: in order for all suffering and death to be repaired by God, all suffering and death had to be endured by a perfectly innocent and righteous person (for only innocent persons have the right of Restoration for wrongs suffered) and only Jesus qualifies as that perfectly righteous person. Divine Justice is therefore satisfied in the Resurrection as the reversal and reparation of all the sin that Jesus unjustly suffered on the cross. Jesus dies under the unjust judgment of Humans, and is raised by the just judgment of God. Jesus’ reward, or inheritance, of the covenantal blessings applies to the rest of Humanity if by the power of the Holy Spirit we participate in His death (through remorse) and participate in His resurrection (through repentance). So the gospel is not that “God substituted Himself to satisfy His own wrath,” which is not Biblical terminology. The gospel is exactly what Paul says it is: “the good news that God has fulfilled His promises to our children in that He raised Jesus up from the dead (Acts 13:30).” The gospel is that God’s covenantal promises to restore the world from Adam’s curse (the subject of the Old Testament) are fulfilled in Jesus’ resurrection (the subject of the New Testament).

What God has joined together, let no man put asunder. Treat shows that, unfortunately, we have torn apart the union between the cross and the kingdom. He shows how the two relate to each other in the grand story of the Bible, demonstrating that the kingdom coming through the cross is a central theme in Scripture. He then defines how this understanding of the Gospel is seen in various doctrines. He lays the groundwork for an un-truncated Gospel, offering a way forward in the midst of many debates about the Gospel and its ramifications. A wonderful work that I will return to again for sure.

This book solved a puzzle in my head that I had been strugglingly with for several years. I have found no other book since which has brought me as much clarity on the topic of the atonement and kingdom relationship in the Bible than Treat's

I got bogged down early on in this thoughtful work, but about a third or so through I found my interest increasing ...steadily...to a wonderful crescendo at the final conclusion. This book got me to view the key theological points of the Bible from new angles and with new connections and intertwinings. At times the author seems to split hairs with certain doctrine, but eventually he developed his assertions more fully so that the "hair splitting" seems to be a good thing!

One of the best books I've read this year. Treat is very balanced and fair in his approach. He summarizes so much scholarly information and synthesizes it into a fresh and helpful combination. His arguments are convincing. And his insights have greatly shaped how I understand Christ's victory on the cross. Not only has Treat's book challenged my assumptions about the connections between the megathemes of atonement and kingdom, it has also been profoundly devotional book. I found myself in awe of the mystery and wisdom of God in the regal glory of the cross.

I found this to be stimulating to my understanding of two topics which deserve close attention. It helped me to think more harmoniously about Christ's Kingdom and his atonement. This will enrich my thinking and teaching on these subjects

Excellent treatment of the subject. First rate academic work while also very understandable in everyday life. Reintegrates for readers what has always been unified in the person of Jesus. Great work!

Very grateful for this book. It is very helpful to understand the kingdom of God and the atonement hence understanding a much deeper knowledge of the Gospel. Builds confidence to the spread of the Gospel through suffering. Great read - will be re-reading in the future at a much slower rate to take time to explore the massive referencing to Scripture especially the use of OT Scriptures.

A very thoughtful and insightful discussion of the different theological viewpoints of Christ the sacrificial victim and Christ the King. Of course these are not mutually exclusive and a "well rounded theological view" would include both.Well written book but probably for those with some theological knowledge

So glad to have taken the time to read this book. It has opened up so many familiar and less familiar passages in the bible, helping me see better how they fit into God's splendid narrative for all of history. The chapter on christus victor through penal atonement was worth the whole book but it really is all excellent.

Elating, even thrilling, to be lead across that gap between understanding the Kingdom and knowing the King!